Steve Cuozzo’s piece in the Post is totally incoherent. I read it three times, but I could not find the connection between the random assertions he makes. It isn’t even an angry rant just senseless blather. Was he drunk when you wrote that? Does the Post have any minimum standards? I continue to be amazed.

http://twitter.com/snogglethorpe Miles Bader

@8f996ad67f04aec5edcfbc5070d76441:disqus Wait, are reporters for these tabloids ever not drunk…?

http://brooklynspoke.wordpress.com Doug G.

Here’s a way to have some fun with the Daily News editorial. Take this paragraph:

“Meantime, the overriding issue to be resolved is whether New York can
absorb the attractive benefits of widespread cycling as a mode of making
quick trips without paying too dearly in sidewalk blockages, traffic
congestion and pedestrian discombobulation, if not dismemberment.”And change one word:”Meantime, the overriding issue to be resolved is whether New York can
absorb the attractive benefits of widespread driving as a mode of making
quick trips without paying too dearly in sidewalk blockages, traffic
congestion and pedestrian discombobulation, if not dismemberment.”

Anonymous

This is my favorite comment from the NYPost editorial:

“[S]o [mayor] [M]ike here’s the deal, —- ticket crooked bicyclists, driving between the lanes, running reds, playing in traffic instead of playing nicely in their own lanes (apartheid anyone?) (emphasis added).

Hahahahahaha. The sense of victimhood is astounding.

http://twitter.com/snogglethorpe Miles Bader

hmm, is dismemberment-by-bike a widespread problem?

Eric McClure

Is anyone surprised that the haters are railing against the alleged, fantastical dangers of bike share while remaining completely mum about actual, real dangers — like the hit-and-run killer in Queens?